Summer < parenting time > - circular talk to deny it

[justwanttoparent]

Please give me advice - basically my Ex is not scheduling my summer < parenting time >. In Utah, summer < parenting time > is "at the option of the noncustodial parent." When I sent my scheduling of the summer < parenting time >, my harrassing Ex said, she already had plans during that time and refered me to a calendar on which she marked the dates that I could pick from. I actually tried to accomodate her, but with my factors, I cannot make my < parenting time > fit. Last year, my Ex used the circular discussion and incorrect interpretations to deny 2 weeks of my < parenting time >. I hope to avoid that denial this year and see my daughter for the time stipulated in the court order & Utah code. What can I do?

[Thoughts?]

I hate guidelines that in an attempt to imply flexibility create ambiguity.

Bottom line points here -- you'll see where I'm going with my ramblings:

How much time does Utah typically allow? Thirty days?

When did you give her notice, and was it in writing?

Did she give you prior notice of her summer commitments?

Did you put last year's concerns in writing or have supporting evidence or objections to her denial?

Would she have a solid argument that the commitments are highly beneficial to the child. By that, I don't mean she simply wants that window for a camping trip -- I mean are they major life opportunities like:
- a family reunion in the South of France;
- an educational travel opportunity funds are already comitted;
- an opportunity to walk the Great Wall of China with the child's youth group;
- summer school or some special opportunity that is for a special need for the child -- i.e., dates are set by the district & the child needs it to advance grades, or has a conflict with World Cup tryouts?

You get my drift?

Here's the basics of it -- you have the right to make reasonable plans with the child, the child has a right to the contact with you, and the Utah guidelines apparently give you presumptive right or higher priority. But life being life, if there is something significant that would benefit the child that is difficult to move on her part, she can use that to deflect a charge of willful contempt.

So garbage in, garbage out, can you answer the above questions, and provide a little more meat to what excuse she is giving for the denial?

[Thoughts?]

Oh, btw, it's not < parenting time >, it's parenting time, or possession. You parent, not visit, your child, and as the parent you are the "parent in possession" during your parenting time. Convicts get < parenting time > time. You're a dad, who cares about his kid. Big difference.

Also, just to get some flavor on the legalities of your orders, is she sole legal, or is there joint legal. Technically that shouldn't swing things, but just gives a flavor of your case.

[justwanttoparent]

First, thanks for your time and help.
Utah allows for 2 weeks of uninterrupted and 2 weeks of interrupted time for the noncustodial parent.
Yes, I gave notice in March. All of my communication is in email.
Her notice was a reply to my email-notice of summer scheduling. Her email said that she had blocked off those times and I had to resubmit my request to fit in times not blocked by her.
Yes, I have last year’s concerns - objections in email.
The Ex has not specified her plans. I get your drift, but in jest I say, her plans can beat mine because I pay child support. Should I ask what her plans include? Last year, the Ex took our daughter to a normal beachside vacation – nothing that would trump my camping in the Utah aspens. In other words, to the best of my knowledge, the Ex is being unreasonable in the scheduling. The Ex is being unreasonable in every other area of co-parenting. My lawyer just tells me to keep accumulating the infractions until we have enough to move a biased Utah court.
Her denial reasons are simply that she was first to block the time. For my work and family events, I can't take the time that the Ex says is open.
You’re right about “< parenting time >” – for brevity I used that word. I will use "parent-time."
We share joint legal custody. Ex has primary place of residence. The Ex has used her hostile aggressive stance to lump us into a court-ordered parent coordinator. This PC does nothing but ask me to concede . . . and PC swears that he asks her to do the same. In this summer parent-time issue, PC just hasn't said anything. last example of bias, the Ex asked the PC for extra sessions with him. I digressed, sorry.

[Thoughts?]

OK, so you have a pretty solid case, no diggings in Roman Ruins on anything planned by her.

You need to take it up a notch. Your notice needs to go by letter, return receipt requested, with copy of the email notice attached, expressing concern about her not allowing the child to see you when your commitments allow. Call it access denial. You need to reference the prior year and state she's establishing a pattern of interfering with your having summer parenting time & access to child X.

First two bits of homework. You need to find out if the PC in your court orders or as defined in Utah statutes is simply an advisor / allowed to be a potential witness, if they're simply an advisor and can't break confidentiality by appearing as a witness, and / or does the Parenting Coordinator have formal authority to interpret / grant some lattitude on orders. States vary widely in the powers of the PC, in some cases they're a coach who can testify, in others a coach who cannot testify, and in others have almost as much authority as a Guardian Ad Litem.

Second, from what she's responded with, figure out a partial compromise. Not a full compromise, a partial compromise. Your goal is to appear the reasonable, meet-in-the-middle person to the court.

Lastly, hope you realize we're not lawyers here, just dads who've been through the system. We offer layman's strategy input at best. It's always best to check in with a lawyer if you can afford to or if you have any doubt.

[Trevor]

I must be missing something here because if orders say the NCP gets to pick the summer schedule, then his notice to her sets the bar and she must book her vacation around that. If verbiage is actually that clear, why would he compromise at all, if he complied with notification timelines? Why would a PC advise caving in to the bullying tactics of the X? [Rhet.]

[Thoughts?]

If CP had provided advanced notice of a family reunion in the South of France, or the child was in a select soccer competition with scholarship & national competition potential, or if the child had a summer school requirement with schedules set by the school district needed to advance to the next grade, what examples can you cite where the bench has found a CP in willfull contempt for not wanting to cooperate with NCP's summer plans? Even if they technically did jive with the statutes? (Rhetorical question there).

The simple reality is I'm trying to help him build a solid case in a biased system where he prevails on slapping the wiatch down hard, has all his "i's" dotted, and perhaps has a shot at fees.

In the middle of a custoy hearing, my ex wanted to take the kids on a vacation that involved international travel. The judge almost fell out of her robes granting her that request, over my lawyer's objections, even though it was technically not 100% in line with orders, and it involved deferring a day of court by a few days. All because it had a direct benefit to the kids. Although I perceived it as manipulative, and was disappointed in the judge's naive position, I still see why the judge did that.

Technically, he can be right about a lot of things. But a finding of willful contempt and fees is a gift that will shut her down hard and will continue giving for every situation in the future where she might have an inclination of not wanting to cooperate. It's a gift that keeps on giving.

Also, I am not an attorney, and not from Utah. In TX, the PC doesn't have huge authority, and they are currently not allowed to testify what was told to them in confidence under most circs. In some states, they do have more authority. Whether they can report or testify to the court varies. In Utah, who knows? If it's PC lite, he may be golden. If it's not, if it's closer to a GAL, and the PC can testify against him in open court, or perhaps even interpret orders or advocate as a friend of the court for order changes if the PC feels it will "improve the family dynamic", he needs to tread lightly.

Good points Trev, oh wise one, but I hope you see my points, at least a little.

[Trevor]

Oh I see and agree to your points...I was just emphasizing the apparent clarity of the orders and hoping the OP was pushing hard on that point, if indeed it's worded in a clear way.

[justwanttoparent]

Thanks again for the help. Like you said, it really helps to get all the details and to cover the angles that the Ex could manipulate for an already biased judge.
Trevor nailed it, I just wish she would do the right thing - following the orders would go a long way. But in my case, any part of the orders that should give flexibility, the Ex has used to create conflict.
In my opinion the PC is a waste. In my case, the PC staunchly refuses to appear in court. He advises on the correct discussion and co-parenting, but he is powerless to enforce it or interpret legal issues. In his own words, a co-parent can just refuse to play ball. So, in order to get progress, the PC pushes me to concede. Worse, I think the PC has bought-in to the Ex's crazy.
I am considering filing a motion for a GaL. At least, a GaL would have bite and I can deal with decisions that are founded legally and on my daughter’s best interests. As in your first post, I can understand letting go of my first option scheduling if the Ex was taking my daughter to Wimbledon (my daughter will be a tennis-great.)

[Thoughts?]

Thanks Trev, your points are very valid.

Justwantto, it does sound like you have a clear handle on things. There's what I call "shock collar therapy" that some of us have posted about in the past. Some exes when they get CP status feel they have God-like power, even when there is joint legal. Now, like some dogs, some will respond to the first time the shock collar is activiated. Others will continue to test the fence a few times, and others will test it for months, before becoming trained. It usually is a factor of the depth fo their personality disorders.

If you've worked with her like a reasonable human being in the past, then she hasn't felt the sting of the shock collar yet. She may respond with your first well documented approach with a certified letter....but she may need three or four tests of the fence, and an angry lawyer letter, before she changes.

In the grand scheme of things, a finding of willfull contempt on access denial is a true gift for you. Having that on record shows a seriously harmful behavior pattern, and she can lose access or her CP status, and be paying support to you, if she doesn't behave.

On the PC, although it sounds like you have a very good feel for how he's exercising his role, I would double check statutes or with an attorney to confirm what your PC can say & do in Utah...just cuz he is worthless & doesn't want to take a witness stand, doesn't mean they can't subpoena him and compel him to describe the nature of conversations between the two of you. In TX, I don't think that's possible any longer. But locally it was abused by some, which is why confidentialities were put around the role.